Proceedings of 10th IOE Graduate Conference

Peer Reviewed
ISSN: 2350-8914 (Online), 2350-8906 (Print)
Year: 2021 Month: October Volume: 10

Suspended Solids Removal Mechanism Comparison in Tube

Settler
Basant Lekhak a , Iswar Man Amatya b
a, b
Department of Civil Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, IOE, Tribhuvan University, Nepal
Corresponding Email: a blekhak16@gmail.com, b iswar@ioe.edu.np

Abstract
Suspended solids removal efficiency of tube settler was analyzed by measuring turbidity at several flow rates.
4*2.8*2 m dimension tube settler with 85 cm long, 40 mm dia. meter tubes was operated to meet the research
objective. Analysis of tube settler was conducted for four discharges viz., 4.5, 7, 8.5 and 10 litre per seconds
(lps). The maximum turbidity removal efficiency was found to be 50.786 % at flow rate of 4.5 lps (maximum
removal in comparison to other discharge rates). This indicates the effectiveness of the tube settler. The
observed actual data was compared with the YAO model, Khatri model and Rajbanshi model to check the
validation of the model at the tube settler of Siddhipur Water Treatment Plant. YAO model developed based on
coagulated water, and Rajbanshi model developed assuming linear relationship between influent and effluent
turbidity cannot be justifiable for this study. Khatri model is showing same trend of data with the observed
analytical method as both are for plain sedimentation concept. Khatri model can be used for the tube settler
and the factor for the representation of observed value to Khatri model is 0.786.
Keywords
Efficiency, Models, Suspended solids, Surface Overflow, Tube Settler, Turbidity

1. Introduction footprints of land.

The most widespread chemical compound on the
globe is water. Water is found in all three states liquid,
solid and gaseous and is a key factor of life on earth
[1]. Due to growing demand of water, it is main
challenge and problem to provide safe, potable water
to all. In surface source of water supply i.e. streams
and rivers the main challenge is to remove the
turbidity caused by suspended solids. Increasing
deforestation, overgrazing of cattle’s, unplanned
excavation in construction activities results mass
movement and landslides, which causes the water in
the rivers and streams rich in suspended solids
causing turbid water [2].
The major process for the water treatment is to
separate the particles from suspension, as it has a
direct impact on the overall working efficiency of
treatment plant. Sedimentation under the action of
gravitational force is considered as one of the most
economical separation methods. Sedimentation is the
most widely used method for the solid removal from
the raw water. Several modifications in sedimentation
tank were made to reduce the cost, detention time,
“Essentially horizontal (θ < 7.5°)” and the “steeply
inclined (θ up to 60°)” are the two commercially
available compositions of tube settlers, where θ is the
angle to the horizontal [3]. The study indicates that
the tube settler concept needs further exploration to
provide operating information and to verify design
criteria, especially in the “essentially horizontal”
tubes [4]. Tube settlers are generally treatment units
with low footprints with detention time less than 15
min. HDPE pipes or tubes are used for the removal of
suspended solids from the raw water in tube settler.
2. Research Objectives
The general objective of this study was to study the
turbidity removal efficiency of tube settler.
Furthermore, the turbidity removal efficiency was also
compared for several models as Khatri model, YAO
model, Rajbanshi model and Observed data for
varying flow rates.

Pages: 220 – 224

 Proceedings of 10th IOE Graduate Conference

3. Materials and Methods Siddhipur Water Treatment Plant, Siddhipur, Lalitpur

was used as working station. The general arrangement
Raw water from the source at the inlet of tube settler of tube settler located at SWTP is shown in the figure
is taken and the treated water at outlet of tube settler is 1 and figure 2.
used for the turbidity measurement. Initially, natural
water samples from the inlet pipe of the tube settler Raw turbid water flows from the inlet chamber to the
were taken to analyze the mechanism of suspended 4*2.8*2 m tube settler. The settling of suspended
solids removal. The influent water is then prepared by particles take place through 85 cm long HDPE pipes
mixing influent raw water with fine solids particles at or tubes placed at 60° inclination to horizontal with
various flow rate and run the tube Settler constructed 40 mm diameter in the designed detention time of 8.5
at SWTP. The fine solid articles were obtained from minutes [5, 6].The removal efficiency depends upon
the sludge zone of the same tube settler. The study was the nature and size of suspended particles present in
then continued with turbid water at various flow rate in water.
the tube settler located at Siddhipur Water Treatment Experimental setup for the completion of the study
Plant. Table 1 lists the parameters that were studied was conducted as:
and the frequency with which they were tested.
Sampling holding tank:
Sample was prepared in 50 liter capacity drum and
Table 1: Experimental parameters and frequency of
continued mixing with the wooden stick. Constant
measurements
turbidity was maintained throughout the experiment
S. N.
Experimental
Unit
Frequency of
Methods period.
Parameters Test
Nephelometric Settler Pipes:
1 Turbidity NTU Thrice a week
method
Weir Formula and HDPE pipes having diameters of 40 mm were used.
Every time
2 Flow Rate l/min
before measurement
Volumetric method Inlet pipe was connected about at 15 cm from the lower
(Beaker and Timer)
3 Temperature °C Thrice a week Thermometer end of pipe for allowing accumulation of sludge.
4 pH Thrice a week Digital pH meter
Solid Four times Oven,
5 mg/lit
Calculation throughout study muffle furnace

4. Experimental Setup

Figure 2: Longitudinal and Cross-section of Tube

Settler

Experimental sample:
Figure 1: Schematic Diagram of Tube Settler Sludge were taken from the sludge zone of the tube

221
Suspended Solids Removal Mechanism Comparison in Tube Settler

settler located at Siddhipur Water Treatment Plant Where,

(SWTP). This sludge was used for the preparation of Tr = Turbidity removed in NTU
artificial turbid water at different time with different To = Influent Turbidity in NTU
turbidity to conduct the experiment in a real field
d. Observed data or Analytical Method:
situation. Laboratory measurement works were
conducted on the lab of SWTP but the essential (Co −Ce )
Removal efficiency (%) = × 100% (4)
measurement instrument were installed in the Co
laboratory. Where,
Turbidity meter: Co = initial turbidity concentration and
A digital turbidity meter Model 331 (manufactured by Ce = Final turbidity concentration after tube settler.
Electronics India) was used for the turbidity
measurement during the whole study period. The 6. Results and Discussion
range for the turbidity measurement by the device was
0 to 1000 NTU. Different parameters were measured in the site for the
fulfillment of the objectives of the study.
Discharge Measurement:
For the calculation of discharge into the channel, Table 2: Experimental parameters measurement
Triangular V notch weir with central angle 60° was
S.N. Parameter Unit Range
used. The triangular V notch weir was placed at the
1 pH - 8.1 – 8.4
outlet of tube settler for discharge measurement.
2 Temperature °C 15.2 – 21.0
3 Inlet water Turbidity NTU 4 - 160
5. Comparison of Several Models 4 Outlet water Turbidity NTU 2 - 98
5 Volatile solids in inlet water mg/l 80 – 200
For the completion of the study the observed data by 6 Fixed solids in inlet water mg/l 200 - 520
analytical method is compared with the YAO model,
Khatri Model and Rajbanshi Model. For the The turbidity removal capacity of the tube settler is
comparison of observed data with Khatri model or observed by measuring influent and effluent turbidity
theoretical model Beaker Test was conducted for at discharges 4.5, 7, 8.5 and 10 lps and SOR: 0.283,
various SOR ranging from 0.6 m/hr to 3m/hr. 0.45, 0.597 and 0.643 m/hr., at different turbidity
a. YAO model: for coagulated water ranges from 20 to 160 NTU. With the increase in
SOR, Flow rates also increases as a result of which
the turbidity removal efficiency goes on decreasing.
Te = a(t)Vs (1)
where,
Te = effluent turbidity in % of influent Turbidity To
a(t) and b(t) = empirical constants depends on influent
turbidity and dose of coagulant
Vs = settling velocity in m/h
b. Khatri model: Khatri [3], developed a model of
tube settler based on beaker test in the laboratory for
prediction of effluent turbidity.
  
b 3
Te = a Vs + 0.25 (2)
(3b + 4)

c. Rajbanshi Formula: Rajbanshi [5] carried out the
study in the tube settler located at Siddhipur water
treatment plant in 2009. The flow range operated by
Rajbanshi was between 2.4 lps to 10.1 lps.
Tr = 0.6927 × To –8.7216 (3)
Figure 3: Average Turbidity Removal efficiency at
various flow rates
With the increment in discharge, average removal
efficiency of the tube settler reduces. SOR increases,

222

flow velocity increases resulting lower settlement of
particles leads decrease in turbidity removal. The
increase in the turbidity increases the concentration of
the suspended solids and at the same time with the
change in the flow rates alters the detention time, as a
result of which removal efficiency changes.
Figure 4: Comparison of various model at 4.5 lps or
0.283 m/h
Figure 5: Comparison of various model at 7 lps or
0.45 m/h
Figure 6: Comparison of various model at 8.5 lps or
0.597 m/h
Figure 4, 5 and 6 shows the sensitivity curve for the
223
Proceedings of 10th IOE Graduate Conference
comparison of various model at various flow rates and
SOR. Beaker tests was conducted and the obtained
data were fitted in the power curve to find removal
efficiency for both YAO and Khatri model. Equation
no. 1, 2, 3, and 4 were used to find the turbidity
removal. For discharge 8.5 lps, 7 lps and 4.5 lps or
SOR 0.597 m/hr, 0.45 m/hr, and 0.2832 m/hr
correlation between Khatri model and Observed
actual model is 0.96161, 0.90246, 0.97046
respectively and between Rajbanshi formula and
Observed actual model is 0.94432, 0.97981, 0.94432
respectively. Rajbanshi model always present linear
data as it is fitted in linear trend, so it doesn’t involve
the role of flow rate for turbidity removal. Comparing
the turbidity removal at various flow rates it is found
from the study that turbidity removal changes with the
flow rates for same range of influent turbidity.
Comparison of Beaker test with Observed actual data
shows the advantages of tube settler over
sedimentation tank as the removal in actual observed
data is more in same detention time.
7. Conclusions
The tube settler in the Siddhipur Water Treatment
Plant was studied in this paper. This study shows that
turbidity removal efficiency of tube settler decreases
thereby increase in the flow rates. This study was
aimed to determine the suspended solids removal
efficiency of tube settler in SWTP at various flow
rates. The maximum turbidity removal efficiency in
tube settler is obtained as 50.786%, 48.482 %, 47.096
% and 45.348 % at SOR of: 0.2832 m/hr, 0.45 m/hr,
0.597 m/hr and 0.643 m/hr respectively. From the
parameters measured, pH and temperature are within
the WHO limits [7]. Turbidity has a high range then
the drinking water limit. For the reduction of turbidity,
tube settler has been installed and this study is also
carried to check the kinetics of turbidity removal in
tube settler. Turbidity up to 160 NTU has been
introduced to find the removal mechanism. The
effluent water from the slow sand filter installed after
tube settler reduces the turbidity of water within the
WHO limit. From the above results in the comparison
of models, Khatri Model i.e. theoretical model and
observed analytical model are alike as both are based
for plain sedimentation concept. We can draw a
conclusion that Khari model can be used at any
working place of tube settler but data must be
obtained from Beaker test. YAO model and observed
data are not similar in nature so we can draw
Suspended Solids Removal Mechanism Comparison in Tube Settler
conclusion that YAO cannot be used in this type of
plain sedimentation case of tube settler as YAO is for
coagulated water only. Rajbanshi model always shows
the linear data as it is fitted as a linear relationship
between influent turbidity and effluent turbidity, it is
found that there is no role of discharge in the
Rajbanshi model. So, YAO due to coagulated water
not appropriate for plain sedimentation concept tube
settler and Rajbanshi model due to linear model are
not appropriate for the tube settler. Correction Factor
value is smaller for the smaller influent turbidity.
Mean value of Factor for Khatri model and observed
value is 0.786.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Siddhipur Water Supply
and Sanitation User’s Organization for the treatment
plant access, IOE Pulchowk Campus for laboratory
and space for the conduction of research and valuable
support.
224
References
[1] Amod Gurjar, Mangesh Bhorkar, A. G. Bhole, and
Payal Baitule. Performance study of tube settlers
module. Int. Journal of Engineering Reasearch and
Application, 7:52–55, March 2017.
[2] Akrur Nath Sharma and Iswar Man Amatya.
Evaluation of turbidity removal performance of upflow
gravel filter. In Proceedings of IOE Graduate
Conference, pages 207–210, 2016.
[3] N. R. Khatri. Tube settler modeling and its use in water
treatment process. Technical report, 2001.
[4] Khemraj Bhandari. Turbidity removal in tube settler
using alum as coagulant. Technical report, Institute of
Engineering, Pulchowk Campus, 2018.
[5] Anu Rajbanshi. Performance of tube settler. Technical
report, Institute of Engineering, Pulchowk Campus,
2009.
[6] Newtap. Siddhipur water treatment plant lalitpur, nepal.
March 2016.
[7] NWDQS. National drinking water quality standards.
Technical report, Kathmandu, Nepal, 2005.